Raising the minimum wage

*magic*

 

Your an idiot. Your argument is that higher wages steal from companies? How much of a fool can you be. You don't think the workers are earning those wages, as inflation rates and minimum wage rates are 4$ off. Your acting nonsensical. Your saying that we should keep wages low, because companies will naturally compete wages? Not true you fool. Mcdonalds and Walmart have the ability in their profit margins to pay 20$, yet they still pay below 10$. Wage levels are not a factor in total success. At least not alone.

Your concept that wages are redistribution are plain idiocy. Should those greedy low skilled workers get payed nothing?!?! Are you denying that all that money comes back two fold? Or have you tottally given up on the republican and democrat condoned consumption boom theory? The three dollar wages go back into the economy more valuable then they left, but a oath like you doesn't understand that. Just like Blue pointed out. The right wing scum would use no actual economic theory, but throw a cheap and unfounded blow to redistribution.

Riddle me this, are you, the oath, denying that consumption increases during times of deflated USD. And if prices are low, and wallets are high, aren't the wage givers making more money? You don't know macroeconomics, so get out.

- - - Updated - - -

The conservative has never picked up a economic textbook,, or else they would understand how deflation works by now. Good thing investopedia exists, for the right wing brain dead.....

Definition of 'Deflation'

A general decline in prices, often caused by a reduction in the supply of money or credit. Deflation can be caused also by a decrease in government, personal or investment spending. The opposite of inflation, deflation has the side effect of increased unemployment since there is a lower level of demand in the economy, which can lead to an economic depression. Central banks attempt to stop severe deflation, along with severe inflation, in an attempt to keep the excessive drop in prices to a minimum.

 

1 workers get payed more
2 companies profit margins decrease
3 prices rise to compensate
4 workers demand a higher wage
5 rinse repeat

 

False. You don't understand economics either. Profit margins are actually widened because deflated dollars leave the company and are re-consumed as inflated ones during inflation. The company leaves richer in the long term. Are you denying that Reagans, Romenys, and Keynes theory on consumption booms are false? Please respond, or shut up.

 

I didn't say that. But it's funny you keep putting words in my mouth to then attack as if I said them.

I'm saying wages should be whatever the economy in aggregate decides they should be. I\m noyt advocating any wage level at all, I'm saying we should all bargain and make deals and decide what wages we shall take/give. They are a factor, of course they are, you can't deny that any expense a firm incurs is a factor is their success.

You are an idiot. I didn't say they should be paid nothing, I'm saying they should be paid whatever wage is decided upon between the worker and the employer. Nothing more, and nothing less.

If people want to consume, they they shall consume. If they don't, then they won't. I don't see why anyone in power should be trying to pull the strings.

You claiming I don't understand doesn't automaticalyl mean I don't. What you really mean is "You don't agree with me ergo you must be wrong because I must be right."

 

please untie your panties, they seem to be all bunched up on you.
the company doesnt leave richer they break even when they have to raise their prices to compensate.
on planet earth a lower profit margin means you leave less richer.

 

Are you denying the congressional research reports? Prices will only go up on average .40$. Given that were matching inflation about 4$, companies are producing about 3.60$. I do not understand your logic, as its broken. Mcdonalds has low margins but high profit. Have you ever taken microeconomics, even a basic course? You learn that size is what matters, not profit margins. Corporations find other ways to retain capital to. They simply exchange their liquid for stocks or put it overseas.

 

No, I have none.

 

80% of mcdonalds restaurants are privately owned you're pretending every large company is a walmart owned by one person.

 

As can be seen, right-wingers are unable to grasp the wage issue here in the U.S., so let’s try a different example. Pollution and corporate responsibility to maintain a clean environment.

It is the right-wingers’ absolute belief that regulating corporate actions is unnecessary, and that companies will act responsibly without government oversight. Of course the explosion of the West Fertilizer Plant in Texas, and the recent polluting of a West Virginia river are just two, of many, examples that blow the belief of willing corporate responsibility out of the water.

It is the right-wingers confidence in the ethics of U.S. businesses, and their beliefs these businesses need not be regulated for the common good, that proves conservatives and neoconservatives are either beyond naive or just plain ignorant.

The idiotic responses you have received from the right-wingers on the wage issue only reinforce this.

 

You said, and I quote, that wages are essentially wealth redistribution, Do not lie here, or cover firm statements.

The wage is 4$ off in deflation. Keynes made this very clear. As the USD falls, consumption's rises. Hence, so is aggregate demand. My proposal increases aggregate demand, so you countered your own point. DO NOT, test me on my keynesian. You will be further crushed.

No, I was applying your circular logic into another scenario. You intend for companies to naturally try to raise wages in competition, although we have already proven that a correlating third factor does not exist. Therefore, further rebuttals will most likely be fallacies.

Raising wages in times of low price deflation increases aggregate demand, as established in point one. You have conceded this also. That the government can increase aggregate demand, by increasing wages, therefore higher wages influence consumption, which stimulates economic growth, which benefits all parties.

You have unintentionally conceded to all four points I have made, therefore screwing the pooch. You are done, as are your arguments. Unless you care, for the final time, to give me a clear answer on if Keynesian consumption boom theory works, why or why not?

 

If the big money begins to take over our elections, the Oligarchy is already here.

 

Assets are a part of a collective whole. Are you denying that. Corporations are given individualism status. Frankly Gunther, you don't know what the hell your talking about, and your out of your league here. At least spiritual has been able to give me longer than one line responses. Also, he doesn't pull out bull$hit facts to sound like he knows what he is talking about.

 

You only need to look at one example to see how raising wages is good for business and its employees; "Costco"! I go there regularly. The place is packed, and the same employees are always there, because they pay them well, they have fair prices, and their profits have to be out the roof because of the business. If Costco can experience this kind of success, so can other companies practicing the same strategy.

Glad you started this thread about minimum wage. It's been a long time coming that the truth needed to get out. It needs to continue. I can see from the few pages already you've decisively won the argument already. What you, I, and the rest of the supporters may not win is the money campaign pouring in against actually implementing a minimum wage hike. The Koch brothers and others with their money machine can drown out the argument that the world is round if they want to. So, as welcome as your post is, and as right as you are, money will grind your winning argument to make it look like rotting meat.

 

you're not making any sense. privately owned means privately owned as in part of the "collective whole" in name only. i cant tell if you're making a statement or asking a question.
i dont mean to sound like a grammar nazi but.. are you pretending you graduated college with a degree in economics and you still dont know the difference between "you're" and "your?"

- - - Updated - - -

are you pretending costco is successful because they pay their employees well?

 

Seriously, people are done debating you. You drop every point, you refuse to explain your arguments when asked, and have not addressed a single premise from the start of the debate. You don't understand macroeconomics, nor do you understand inflation or deflation. Here is the one question I will ask you, and I want a brief answer....

Are you denying the Keynes theory of consumption booms in deflation?

- - - Updated - - -



are you pretending costco is successful because they pay their employees well?[/QUOTE]

Pretending? Bias has no place in coherent arguments

- - - Updated - - -

Also, are you denying that an increase in wage, in certain supply and demand trends, will increase aggregate demand?

 

That has nothing to do with wanting people to be paid a certain amount. Lol you're still putting words in my mouth.

See you're still putting words in my mouth. What you're saying has nothing to do with what I said. Also a simple google search will show you that Keynes was wrong, wrong wrong, about many, many things.

I don't intend for ANYTHING. I want to let people decide for themselves. Unlike you, I am not trying to manipulate the economy based on what I think everyone should be doing.

You're still just moving money around. The increased amount of money some people get is simply money added to their coffers that would have gone to lower wage jobs that no longer exist. Some people can buy more, others can now buy less.

 

I am no more pretending, than you are pretending to ask an intelligent question.

 

no but deflation isnt whats going to happen when profit margins decrease. you're still pretending this magical deflation is going to appear out of thin air when its not. extra money to pay employees isnt going to just fall out of the sky, not on planet earth anyways.

it increases demand but without your magical deflation the demand would only be met with more inflation.

- - - Updated - - -

i asked a question and pretended nothing, you failed to answer and in doing so admitted to pretending.

 

You just eliminated yourself from all logic and reason with that first paragraph. No sane person can say all talk shows are conservative, unless you add "...on Fox News". If ONE STATION is the media, you're a crazy person. And yes, there is a difference between stations. MOST are left leaning to slightly left and then there's FOX which is center to mostly Right depending on the show. Thats the media. All the proof you need is how Obama is treated by each media outlet. Do they criticize him or don't they. One 1 station actually reports on what he does. The rest sugar coat or flat out IGNORE anything negative. Any denial of this fact means you don't live in the real world.

 

Are you......... insinuating the USD has not been deflating for the past 7 years? Originally inflation matched the wage, but now its 4$ off.

- - - Updated - - -

Man, for the past hour and a half, I have been giving people complete blocks of texts, and have been give hardly coherent sentences in return. Here's my conclusion

You concede that Reagans consumption boom theory works. You concede that the USD has been deflating. You concede to the whole debate

- - - Updated - - -

This debate is on minimum wages. Please stay on topic. If you have no insight to provide on the topic, then I'll have to ask you to leave.

 

yes it has been, i meant to say inflation. my mistake.
when you pay the lowest bracket more you have to pay every other bracket more. so you're not just looking at the small price increase needed to compensate for the minimum wage worker it increases to compensate the cost of paying every worker more. everyone winds up in need of a raise. so when prices rise it wont matter if people have more money to spend since its going to be worth less.

that wasnt even in reply to something you said. i was talking to someone else. you're counting words as if more makes your argument valid. lets just say im simplifying things so you can understand them.

 

It wasn't very circular but it seems you're just making claims and assuming you're right.

Not denying that, though "most" is not accurate

false

also false

Not even neo-keynesians completely agree with him. His work certainly was an important development, but so was Adam Smith - but classical economics isn't exactly 100% true now is it? I recommend you compare and contrast:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Keynesian_economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-Keynesian_economics

And being dismissive of supply-side, monetarist and new classical theories is just being an ideologue. The answer is usually in the middle. Keynes is NOT the be all and end all.

How can they pay everyone more money without detracting from their own wealth? Like I said, all you're doing is moving money around.

To actually do what you propose, you'd need to increase the money supply. Then, due to lag, demand would temporarily increase because the relationship between the amount of money and how it is used to represent the subjective value of goods would temporarily be out of sync. This is assuming that Keynes' idea of price stickiness, that the prices won't quickly adjust to this change in the money supply, is true; I would argue the jury is still out on that, considering that simply creating more money does not guarantee this result (for example, Japan).

As such, I consider the idea guesswork, the outcome of which no one can really predict and therefore it's just uneccessary meddling that may simply create inflation without economic growth to mitigate it.

I'm not seeing that logic.

Except that it requires the Fed to be psychic to actually work.

Just because you are acting like I'm the devil, I won't answer that question. Just to (*)(*)(*)(*) you off. Though if my previous answers don't give you a good enough idea of where I stand, I can't help you.

 

Okay. So isn't an increase in the minimum wage an increase in the supply of money? On a practical level, I mean. Even if you don't increase the actual amount of money in the total economy, you're still putting more money in the hands of people that will spend more, as opposing to saving more, because their cost of living takes up more and their discretionary income (the stuff you can turn into savings, among other things) is less. More money being spent means that more money is available, and ... shouldn't prices go up?

Isn't that's what historically happens?

I'd love to be wrong on this. Raising the minimum wage seems so simple, if it actually works, that'd be great and I can be all in favor of it. Prove my doubts unfounded, I'd love it.

 

Yes, your definitely getting it! Prices will go up, but you have to consider, there is more than one thing controlling deflation. We are naturally deflated in the economy, so prices are dirt low. Which means consumers will spend more and more, creating a economic boom until the economy stabilizes again. You see, the plan isn't to have a fixed wage, but control it as inflation does. So it will go down, as consumption goes down. This will create a cycle of never ending booms, with actually more inflation in the long run.

Let me try to simplify this for you. Inflation, makes foreign investment and trade easier. The rich help the economy the most with a inflated dollar. Deflation, helps internal growth and investment soar. The poor help the economy the most with a deflated dollar.

So, the theory is, that when the dollar is deflated, make sure the poor spend as much as possible. When the dollar is inflated, help the rich spend as much as possible. By giving the poor deflated dollars, they go back into corporations as MORE inflated dollars then they began with. Thus the rich will have more money every cycle. And the poor will have more money every cycle.

Over time, we can afford to make more money, making us richer as a whole. Of course there are other ways to work the inflation/deflation theory, but the minimum wage is one such example. This is the argument put forward by the democratic party.